hbrother

Right away this strikes me as an instance where there is a better word. Who is it that wouldn't know what an anemometer is (and to use the word in its appropriate place), the journalist or the readership?

If laws are passed that would prevent a church from renting a school building wouldn't that be prohibiting the free exercise of religion? I don't see how a person could argue that by allowing a group to rent a school building that the government is SUPPORTING that group. Sounds like the church group is SUPPORTING the schools/government.

Make no mistake I not drawing any conclusions about work ethic being related to marital status. My point is that there is a lack of dignity, decorum, and commitment that many would like to see in their governor and elected leaders when an unmarried man cohabits with his girlfriend in the executive mansion. It is a misuse of privilege in the eyes of many I dare say, and exhibits poor judgment for behavior conducted in the public eye. It is not above reproach (a fact evidenced by the existence of this very story and comments). Another reason to be embarrassed to be Oregonian. This lack of dignity and commitment is part of what I see as a harbinger of 4 more years of bad decisions and leadership that is lacking. Ancient proverb - The tree is known by its fruit.

How classy for Oregon...something to truly be proud of: a tired, ineffectual, twit ex-doctor who in his own words admitted he wasn't up to the task of governing the state LAST time he had the job. Now we've given him shot at screwing it all up AGAIN...oh...AND he installs his mistress in the executive mansion with no stated intention of honoring their "committed" relationship by actually marrying her. This bodes well. He's going to tackle all of the problems of the state with the same tenacity, hard work, honor, and "committment" which he has demonstrated in his personal life. But THIS time it will work, right?

How great for Oregon. How classy. Hope there's someone who knows what to do the next time the job is open. We won't elect him but that's the way we like things in Oregon.

I'm interested by the answer this woman gave to the question about the ordination of women and the authority of scripture. She got part of her answer correct: there is no scriptural authority or example for any individual to be 'ordained.'

But what strikes me is that she referred to some "pontifical commission's" report from 1976 for interpretation of scripture. Especially for someone who is supposed to be somehow specially qualified for the work of a spiritual leader then why not just open the pages of the New Testament and see what it says? It was beautifully written in such a way that anyone who studies can find the truth. It's simply and plainly there. But the message of the scripture is too foolish for the 'wise' person, however. (...but God has chosen the foolish things of the world to shame the wise, and God has chosen the weak things of the world to shame the things which are strong...1 Corinthians 1:27.)

As the woman in the article indicated there are things in religion which are not in scripture. What is notably absent in scripture is any mention of a system of religion such as what these people above (and in the article) refer to, who endlessly labor to invent something or to search for something that tickles their ears and pleases their desires rather than what obeys and honors the intent of the Designer, Maker, and Savior. Christ died as Passover was to begin, arose on the third day, and remained for 40 days. On Pentecost (50 days after Passover) the Holy Spirit came on those who were assembled at Jerusalem and Peter preached the first sermon. The church began. Then. At that time. Salvation was spelled out (Acts 2:37-42). Can it be simpler? The church as Christ instituted it never was some large, convoluted, complex, hierarchical system prone to gluttony of power or money. It was (and remains to be) simple, local, autonomous churches with Godly leadership, full of people who are trying their best to serve and to live righteously. Not perfect people -- sinners. Not ONLY Christians, but Christians ONLY. To assume that the church needs to change with the times is to assume it was incorrectly designed at the outset, that the Lord didn't know what He was doing. He did. People: it is so much simpler and more beautiful than what most folks think!

Yes, congratulations to the new parents. But the first baby born in the "new decade" is still one year from being born. It may seem like a small detail to many but just like 10 years ago, when so many were incorrectly asserting that the "new millennium" as well as the new century was upon us on Jan. 1, 2000, there is a tendency to prematurely proclaim the new era has arrived before finishing the old one (whether decade, century, or millennium). Standards!